Aaron Griffin wrote:
Mechanisms have existed for like 20 years before dbus to communicate with other programs.
and those don't require a user space daemon.
dbus is just another way to do it that has a smell of "architecture astronomy" - as if they all scoffed at the actual ways to do IPC on various Unicies and said "Oh, I can design better".
"Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." – Henry Spencer
That's why I dislike it.
+1 I'll add some additional points: - it's implementation is large broken. - most software depending on it, will crash when dbus crashes, or fail to start uncracefully, or behave unexpected. - some systems are actually not supported by hal while they are by udev and have system-v IPCs. - reinventing the wheel and calling it super-boat-2000 isn't going to help anyone. Instead of fixing problems, people constantly create new ones. - FDO is hierarchic and polical level. Dbus is hierarchic on technical level. FDO wishes to provide a better experience to users by integrating all software nicely into one global truth. The Foss ecosystem is not hierarchic. The Foss ecosystem does not require a single truth to rule them all. The Foss ecosystem does not require to be competitive with OtherOs. -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
